The Wright Stuff - The Life of The Wright Brothers | Part 1

[@austinbecton5341]

I hope my hometown will produce great inventors again. Dayton raised up many world-changing innovators.

[@dextervandemark7082]

I love these amazing videos of History of Flight. I owned a 1958 Piper try Pacer. Enjoyed that plane so very much. But to know the origin of flight and how the evolution of it happened is so educational. Thank you for sharing this video.

[@marelrai6247]

Cheers to the world's two genius.. really inspiring life....

[@diogpapafundior2788]

MaRel Rai - airplane????????????????The 2003 flying replica of Flyer I 1903 couldn't fly more than 115 feet (35 m) The 2003 accurate replica [1] of the Wright brothers' plane, tested on December 17, 1903, was not able to do more than short flights. None of its takeoffs came close to the claimed 59 seconds flight performed on December 17, 1903. What the 2003 experiment really showed was that the plane from 1903 could have been theoretically able to take off and fly chaotically for 100 - 115 feet, no more. Flyer I was uncontrollable and not capable to execute a sustained flight. The tests from 2003 demonstrated that the Wright brothers had exaggerated, at best, the performances of their claimed 1903, 59 seconds flight.   1) "On November 20, 2003, Dr. Kevin Kochersberger piloted the 1903 Wright Experience Replica Flyer. With 15-18 mph winds he flew a distance of nearly 100 feet."2) "December 3, 2003 test flight of the Wright Experience 1903 Wright Flyer Replica. Dr. Kevin Kochersberger was at the controls and piloted the Flyer for a distance of 115 feet. Slight cross wind after initial rotation which is compensated with slight wing warp." The instability of Flyer I had been already predicted by prof. Fred Culick who tested in the wind tunnel another replica, different from the one that flew in 2003: ""They built it and then drew as they went along," said Fred Culick, professor of aerodynamics at the California Institute of Technology and chief engineer on Cherne's team. …" Cherne's group, working mainly on weekends in a warehouse donated by a rocket company in El Segundo, finished what they considered an exact replica. Then in 1998 they tested it at NASA's Ames Research Center near Sunnyvale, Calif. Three weeks of wind-tunnel tests of their Wright Flyer replica "clearly showed how unstable it was and how it can't be flown safely," said Culick." Source: community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20031008&slug=wright08 ^

[@Anonymous-god]

Respect

[@SemperFighting]

Great documentary, I think I saw it once back in high school or junior high.

[@Richesfam]

If two or three ppl come into an agreement, things come to pass

[@yootoober2009]

There were plenty of "aeronautical engineers" during the Wright brothers time but not one of them "figured out" what it took to make a heavier than air machine fly. Their "engineering" titles did not give them the "engineering" insight into "flight" but the Wright brother's engineering intuitions and critical engineering observations did. This made them more than aeronautical engineers - they were geniuses.

[@crypter27]

The right brothers are American heroes!

[@edemarrodrigues4495]

crypter27 .no no no

[@gghhhfghgh]

Kkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

[@crypter27]

@@gghhhfghgh What an uncultured Phillistine you are.

[@gmelo8218]

Great !

[@michelsaintcloud335]

The Wright Brothers deserve a very special place in the history of aviation but why the Americans forget great American aviation pioneers like John J. Montgomery and Glenn H. Curtiss?

[@yootoober2009]

There can only be one claimant to the "first heavier than air machine flight". All other pioneers after that were all improvements to the machine and innovations in the application of what the Wright brothers have proven to work. Ailerons are just a variation of the wing warping for lateral control that the Wright brothers "invented". They had the patent to all that they discovered. Everybody else had the patents to cover their own discoveries based on the Wright Flyers.

[@sanpol4399]

Santos Dumont was the first man to fly an airplane. To believe in any airplane flight claim before Santos, faith is needed, and that is why this polemic goes forever. It mixes faith with fact. I stay with facts = Alberto Santos Dumont with his 14-bis.🙂

[@cardinalRG]

Montgomery and Curtiss are hardly forgotten among Americans.

[@sanpol4399]

@@cardinalRG Wright brothers should be remembered as the ones who delayed american aviation. Their design had many flaws, and instead of developing it, they decided to fight other inventors with better ideas. Really a shame that american history tries to hide .

[@cardinalRG]

@@sanpol4399 --Hey San Pol, you old question dodger. How typical of you to respond to an argument that nobody here made. At any rate, if you’re interested in an exchange, then you need to catch up with the answers you still owe me for the questions you’ve ignored.

[@Robert-pg2id]

This is wrong - Gustave Whitehead flew in Bridgeport Connecticut in 1901...he was the true First in Flight...

[@kickbutoxy1218]

They did it with their own funding

[@sharonraizor2839]

Yep!. They had to keep returning to Dayton to make some bicycles to sell to fund their efforts.

[@JesusTorres-qr1gz]

Why history don't talk about their engineer friend that built their engine?

[@sharonraizor2839]

Charlie Taylor is always documented if you research the Wrights. They certainly gave him due credit when they told their story. The Wrights became the symbol of flight. We could also talk about the contributions of their mother and sister.

[@gghhhfghgh]

Esses dois só voaram em 1908, dois anos depois de Santos Dumont, Henry Farman e Bleriot.

[@cardinalRG]

What is your reasoning to believe that the Wrights didn't fly before 1908, please?

[@rescue270]

So sick of this diatribe. I'm so sorry but Santos-Dumont, Henri Farman, and Louis Blériot were great aviation pioneers but they did not have what the Wrights had in 1903. The Wrights invented the wind tunnel, which proved to be essential to their success. Something that they then used their wind tunnel to develop was their propeller design. Nobody had a propeller like this and that is what gave them their greatest edge.

[@gghhhfghgh]

@@rescue270 você acredita mesmo que o Flyers 1 pesando 340 Kg com piloto com apenas 12 Hp de potência de motor vôo? Acredita também que galinha voa?

[@gghhhfghgh]

@@cardinalRG pelo mesmo motivo que eu inventei o Facebook! mostrei uma foto sem data 5 anos depois de Zuckerberg tinha 3 amigos e 2 crianças que viram eu criar o Facebook. Mas ninguém acreditou!kkkkkkkkkk

[@cardinalRG]

@@gghhhfghgh --I have no idea what your incoherent comment is trying to express.

[@ayesharahmathkhan4981]

the gretest heros that is Wright Brothers.but only think in todays world so many people and new gen......they dont know who is Wright Brothers each and every airport they should keep Wright Brothers statue in the entrance and picture on ticket this is great Wright Brothers respect................?

[@diogpapafundior2788]

AyeshaRahmath Khan - why this Shit don't flew? The 2003 flying replica of Flyer I 1903 couldn't fly more than 115 feet (35 m) The 2003 accurate replica [1] of the Wright brothers' plane, tested on December 17, 1903, was not able to do more than short flights. None of its takeoffs came close to the claimed 59 seconds flight performed on December 17, 1903. What the 2003 experiment really showed was that the plane from 1903 could have been theoretically able to take off and fly chaotically for 100 - 115 feet, no more. Flyer I was uncontrollable and not capable to execute a sustained flight. The tests from 2003 demonstrated that the Wright brothers had exaggerated, at best, the performances of their claimed 1903, 59 seconds flight.   1) "On November 20, 2003, Dr. Kevin Kochersberger piloted the 1903 Wright Experience Replica Flyer. With 15-18 mph winds he flew a distance of nearly 100 feet."2) "December 3, 2003 test flight of the Wright Experience 1903 Wright Flyer Replica. Dr. Kevin Kochersberger was at the controls and piloted the Flyer for a distance of 115 feet. Slight cross wind after initial rotation which is compensated with slight wing warp." The instability of Flyer I had been already predicted by prof. Fred Culick who tested in the wind tunnel another replica, different from the one that flew in 2003: ""They built it and then drew as they went along," said Fred Culick, professor of aerodynamics at the California Institute of Technology and chief engineer on Cherne's team. …" Cherne's group, working mainly on weekends in a warehouse donated by a rocket company in El Segundo, finished what they considered an exact replica. Then in 1998 they tested it at NASA's Ames Research Center near Sunnyvale, Calif. Three weeks of wind-tunnel tests of their Wright Flyer replica "clearly showed how unstable it was and how it can't be flown safely," said Culick." Source: community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20031008&slug=wright08 ^

[@awfulorv]

For thousands of years man wished to be able to fly. These men set out to do it, and after hundreds, likely thousands, of setbacks, they persevered. They had to re-think everything that "educated" men had written about the subject, and neither had finished high school, although they would have easily qualified for engineering degrees. My son once brought his civics book to me, which had a page and a half on Marilyn Monroe, and one and a half paragraphs on the Wright Brothers. And that disrespect still goes on today. We have planes which can carry 650 passengers, 550 mph through the skies. These men started all that, and it wasn't easy, and it was dangerous, and it was all new, to all men. Think of them when next you board a plane, they'd like that.

[@sanpol4399]

I just would like someone to explain how a 340,2 kg plane could fly sustainable with only 12 hp , and with part of this power lost in the transmission. Any clue about how this was possible ?

[@yootoober2009]

I would like for you first to explain why a "340.2kg plane could fly sustainable(sic) with only 12 hp IS NOT POSSIBLE, is that your conclusion based on your math? also, how much of the 12 hp was lost in the "transmission"? My conclusion is - the Wright brothers did their work, did the math and did it, flew the first heavier than air machine. All the other claims were all failed attempts at "controlled flight".

[@sanpol4399]

@@yootoober2009 The point on every claim, is that who claim must prove it, not the opposite. Besides, this simple questions I am asking should be very easy to answer . The transmission loss of power is something pointed just to tell, even the weak 12 hp engine had less effective power available. Even if it was 12 hp direct drive , with no transmission loss it still would be impossible to make it fly sustainable. Lets be sceptical, try to find any airplane with the same weight power ratio in the world that can fly sustainable and put the link here . If you do not find, don't you think it is a strong evidence that it is impossible? That is the reason that no unchanged copies of the Flyer never flew by itself. There is no way to scape the physics of flight. It is just science man. Cheers 👍

[@stevebett4947]

The Wrights called it close. 12 hp was not enough to sustain flight over 1 minute and that was the best performance they achieved in 1903. The original Wright Flyer was wrecked by a wind gust and the Wright's never tried to rebuild it. There are a couple of claimed replicas of the Wright Flyer that often fail to get off the ground without a catapult. When it does get off the ground, the pilot usually crashes. The Wrights had the benefit of 2 years of practice on their gliders that replica pilots lack.. However, there are a couple of filmed replica flights that were close to the 1903 record of 852 ft. . I suggest contacting the replica builders for answers to your question.

[@kenneth9874]

@@sanpol4399 there was an unusually high barometric pressure at the location at the time which favored the performance of the engine

[@sanpol4399]

@@kenneth9874 It looks an excuse to justify none of the replicas flew sustained so far. Just like the usual excuses : -The pilots today have no skills and experience like the Wright brothers had on that machine. -The replicas did not fly because the air pressure, and wind, and temperature and air moisture were not perfect during all the the replicas attempt to fly.🙂 Bottom line is: There is no proof about any Flyer flight before 1908.

[@apusapus71]

After starting the first Mile High club together they refused to look at each other.

[@ElohimElite]

Alberto Santos Dumont, the pioneer aviator and the man who really invented the aeroplane The flight was recorded on a film - which still exists - and it was officially certified by the International Aeronautics Federation. It won Santos Dumont the Archdeacon Cup from such rivals, friends and colleagues as Louis Blériot, who three years later was to be the first man to fly the Channel. On 12 November 1906 the Brazilian made a flight that lasted 21.2 seconds and covered 220 metres. The first flight was witnessed by perhaps a thousand Parisians who went mad with delight as he landed. Given Santos Dumont's proven and well-documented success in the air, the claims put forward by the Wright Brothers to have invented the aeroplane look suspiciously weak. There is only one photograph of their machine supposedly taken on its first flight on 17 December 1903. The picture demonstrates that Flyer had an engine of only 12hp and no undercarriage to facilitate an independent take off. Of the handful of spectators who were supposed to have been present many were employees of the Wrights' bicycle shop. As late as 1939 the US National Aeronautic Association was admitting that the Wrights' flight did not take place till 1908. "It's one of the biggest frauds in history," of the Wrights' inaugural flight. "No one saw it, and they used a catapult to launch" the airplane.

[@sharonraizor2839]

No catapult and not one employee of Wrights. Get your facts straight. When Dumont flew for the first time, the Wrights had already been circling Huffman Prairie for two years, or was it four?

[@gghhhfghgh]

O engraçado e que nunca ninguém viu esses vôos de 1903 a 1905! E não exite provas. Kkkkkkkk os Wright só voaram em 1908!

[@sanpol4399]

@@sharonraizor2839 Man, talk even a parrot can do. Do you have any proof about ANY Flyer flight before 1908? If yes, tell us, and put your name in history for being the first to prove it.🙂

[@paulinesimon2257]

Please, PLEASE, couldn't we get a French translation ? Thanks in advance !

[@vracan]

Why don't they have a real movie based on thier life? I don't get it, they have one of amelia earhart but not the wright brothers? Thier story is way more captivating than amelia!

[@johnc4876]

vracan Steven Spielberg bought the rights to David McCullough’s book on them. Perhaps a movie will be made. Let’s hope.

[@diogpapafundior2788]

vracan - why this Shit don't flew. The 2003 flying replica of Flyer I 1903 couldn't fly more than 115 feet (35 m) The 2003 accurate replica [1] of the Wright brothers' plane, tested on December 17, 1903, was not able to do more than short flights. None of its takeoffs came close to the claimed 59 seconds flight performed on December 17, 1903. What the 2003 experiment really showed was that the plane from 1903 could have been theoretically able to take off and fly chaotically for 100 - 115 feet, no more. Flyer I was uncontrollable and not capable to execute a sustained flight. The tests from 2003 demonstrated that the Wright brothers had exaggerated, at best, the performances of their claimed 1903, 59 seconds flight.   1) "On November 20, 2003, Dr. Kevin Kochersberger piloted the 1903 Wright Experience Replica Flyer. With 15-18 mph winds he flew a distance of nearly 100 feet."2) "December 3, 2003 test flight of the Wright Experience 1903 Wright Flyer Replica. Dr. Kevin Kochersberger was at the controls and piloted the Flyer for a distance of 115 feet. Slight cross wind after initial rotation which is compensated with slight wing warp." The instability of Flyer I had been already predicted by prof. Fred Culick who tested in the wind tunnel another replica, different from the one that flew in 2003: ""They built it and then drew as they went along," said Fred Culick, professor of aerodynamics at the California Institute of Technology and chief engineer on Cherne's team. …" Cherne's group, working mainly on weekends in a warehouse donated by a rocket company in El Segundo, finished what they considered an exact replica. Then in 1998 they tested it at NASA's Ames Research Center near Sunnyvale, Calif. Three weeks of wind-tunnel tests of their Wright Flyer replica "clearly showed how unstable it was and how it can't be flown safely," said Culick." Source: community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20031008&slug=wright08 ^

[@awfulorv]

By all means, why has there not been a great movie made of their lives, and accomplishments, it's begging to be produced.

[@crypter27]

cool

[@epic8843]

7 years ago??? Pssshhhhh 2024 just gets worse bruh

[@crypter27]

@@epic8843 so true

[@MarceloDT200]

A lie that lasts a hundred years, no one saw them fly and what they built is nothing more than an airplane like many made before that also did not fly, with their greed for patents prevented the birth of aviation on American soil culminating in the breaking of their patents. The inventor of the airplane was Santos Dumond.

[@cardinalRG]

I encourage you to do some genuine research.

[@dylanmorris9122]

Thoes are my granpas

[@sharonraizor2839]

They had no children

[@rogerswyer5357]

Not over impressed with hype over first flight, many gliders had flown before, engines existed for several years, ships had screw propellers and rudders for many years. not sure about degree of airfoil as well.

[@lordtourette974]

can i know is they hav wife?

[@xeganxerxes4319]

Lord Tourette Neither ever married.

[@sharonraizor2839]

@@xeganxerxes4319 "I cannot support a wife and an airplane" - Wilbur Wright.

[@Chris-um3se]

Hop this isn't antiwhightism PBS NPR propaganda

[@boasnovas6047]

The French did not yet know the invention of the Wright brothers. Controlled flight.

[@wilburnorvillewilburn5801]

Boas Novas JACK CHERNE DECLAROU EM ENTREVISTA EM 1998 A RESPEITO DE UMA REPLICA TESTADA POR ELE E OUTROS ESPECIALISTAS EM TUNEIS DE VEMTO EM 1998. -- ESTA MÁQUINA SE VOASSE APRESENTARIA UM VÔO CAÓTICO, ONDE ESTÁ A CONTROLABILIDADE EM VÔO CAÓTICO TÁ PROVADO QUE A MAQUINA NÃO TINHA CONTROLE, REPLICAS DOS WRIGHT REALIZAM PRECÁRIAS CORRIDAS SEM VELOCIDADE, NÃO DECOLAM, NÃO PERMANECEM NO AR COM A FORÇA DO MOTOR E NÃO ATERRISSAM SE ESPATIFAM NO CHÃO. ISTO AÍ A INVENÇÃO AVIÃO? ESTES DOIS NÃO SABIAM NADA.

[@boasnovas6047]

WILBURN ORVILLE Wilburn As asas do Flyer são aerodinâmicas.

[@wilburnorvillewilburn5801]

se fossem aerodinamicas mesmo não teriamos a quantidade de replicas que não voaram é replica demais no chão inclusive no original aquela de 2003 demorou 18 anos pra ficar pronta. o maior problema é a fisica que msotra que os motores eram fracos demais pro peso da aeronave, por isto as réplicas sem modernização não voam, a quantidade de replicas que ficaram no chão que indcam que eles não voavam e as condições técnicas originais. Muito longe de um avião. era mais um planador motorizado, já havia sido testado.

[@wilburnorvillewilburn5801]

este argumento não justifica a incapacidade de voar sem modernização se eles tivessem o primeiro avião ele tinha que correr, decolar, permanecer no ar com a força do motor e aterrissar.

[@boasnovas6047]

WILBURN ORVILLE Wilburn Apenas as aerodinâmicas asas do Flyer capacitaram todas essas variáveis. Sugiro consultar a fórmula de sustentação. A César o que é de César.

[@heikohassenmuller2400]

For al little bit more correct history.... Two years before the Wright brothers "Gustav Weißkopf" - a german - do the first motor flight... This was in 1901 and this was 2 Years before the Wright brothers...

[@rickroscoe4734]

+Heiko Hassenmüller - Doubtful. No pictures exist of Whitehead's plane flying, only on the ground. And Whitehead's plane was basically a powered glider that had very poor control by the pilot, if any control at all. If Whitehead "flew", it was probably more of a "hop" than a flight. The Wright brothers great contribution was not to invent a flying machine, but to invent the method for a pilot to control a flying machine in the air. Nobody had ever done that and nobody else was even close in 1903. The Wright Brothers carefully documented their experiments and inventions. Whitehead wrote little, if any documentation, and turned out to be a bit of a crook in business and was probably a charlatan. Don't believe it, the Wright Brothers invented controlled, powered flight.

[@michelsaintcloud335]

Rick Roscoe you said: "The Wright brothers great contribution was not to invent a flying machine, but to invent the method for a pilot to control a flying machine in the air. Nobody had ever done that and nobody else was even close in 1903". You are wrong, you need to read about John J. Montgomery. Let's see what wikipedia tell us: "John Joseph Montgomery was an American inventor who is best known for his invention of controlled heavier-than-air flying machines. Although Montgomery never claimed firsts, his gliding experiments of the 1880s are considered by some historians and organizations to have been the first controlled flights of a heavier-than-air flying machine in America."

[@yootoober2009]

@@michelsaintcloud335 - If Montgomery never claimed the first, then he was not the first. You just said "his GLIDING experiments" are considered by some historians.....in america. Since you are taking "some historians and organizations" words giving credit to Mongomery, then I shall go with the majority of historians and organizations who agree that the Wright brothers "flew the first heavier than air machine" therefore they invented the airplane, and they invented the first controlled heavier than air machine - the airplane.

[@kenneth9874]

@@michelsaintcloud335 in a glider, big difference

[@kenneth9874]

Lol

[@robertlafnear4865]

Malcolm Robert McKeller is my Cousins husband.

[@madhusmitaswain3123]

We should have made Wright brothers instead of Einstein.

[@edemarrodrigues4495]

santos dumont pai da aviacao .comprovado pelo.clube de paris

[@machia0705]

edemar rodrigues He flew 3 years after the Wrights.

[@brianamato1078]

No...Santos-Dumont flew a LIGHTER THAN AIR CRAFT. Essentially a balloon with a motor and prop. The Wright Brothers flew a HEAVIER THAN AIR CRAFT, it took off from the ground under its own power, flew completely controllably and landed again. That's different.

[@blkwizzard50]

how much funding do they need LOL

[@brandonschiefelbein4387]

The wright brothers are my cousins

[@connormclernon26]

Elaborate

[@planeboy1318]

yeah... right.

[@zacharycat]

Couldn't they get a narrator who isn't a sex fiend?